“Two or more offenses may be charged in the same charging instrument in a separate count for each offense if the offenses charged are alleged to have been committed by the same person and are … connected together or constitut[ed] parts of a common scheme or plan.” ORS 132.560(1)(b)(C).

Defendant appealed an amended judgment of conviction of ORS 167.017(1), ORS 166.270(1), and ORS 166.220(1). He assigned error the trial court’s disallowance of demurrer. Defendant argued the state did not allege sufficient facts to properly join multiple counts under one conviction pursuant to ORS 132.560. The State argued that the connection was apparent through the “nature and timing” of the Defendant’s alleged offenses. “Two or more offenses may be charged in the same charging instrument in a separate count for each offense if the offenses charged are alleged to have been committed by the same person and are … connected together or constitut[ed] parts of a common scheme or plan.” ORS 132.560(1)(b)(C). The Court of Appeals held that the state did not properly join multiple counts because it did not use language to specifically connect the crimes. The trial court erred by disallowing demurrer based upon improper joinder. The error was not harmless. Reversed and remanded for entry of judgment allowing demurrer.